The ethical dilemma

Last week I attended a debate arranged by PRweek and the University of Westminster. The motion of the debate was “PR has a duty to tell the truth”. Interestingly PR guru Max Clifford and senior lecturer in PR Simon Goldsworthy’s arguments against the motion won the debate by 138 votes to 124.

Going back to the ethical issues this blog has dealt with earlier I think it’s interesting that so many PR students and PRO’s don’t have a problem with lying. The industry is already struggling with its reputation, and with so many ‘unethical’ practitioners the tendency doesn’t seem to be shifting any time soon. And as new media gets more and more popular, will the trend be that every time you get stuck you’ll lie to achieve the greater good?

For the motion group corporate affairs director of Vodafone, Simon Lewis said that “Nowadays you have to get the news out, otherwise you’ll be reading it on someone else’s blog”. But isn’t one part of the PR practitioner’s job to make matters better for clients? Goldsworthy argued that he couldn’t imagine a world where PRO’s spoke freely about every single worry affecting their company. “It would be a foolhardy PR professional who would say that a client has a big problem.”
Max Clifford ended the debate by stating that “PR is about getting the right results for the clients….Young PRO’s before me tonight have to ask themselves one thing: to be a successful PR professional you have to get results, and you have to make up you own mind about how you get them”.

If this debate reflects the truth, that most PRO’s would lie for their clients if they pay enough money for it, then the PR industry is facing many years of distrust by the public. I agree with the motion in some ways, but I have to admit that I voted against it. I don’t think that the industry can be totally transparent. You are paid by clients to do a job, and your trust should be with them. The question in my opinion is how do you know when you've crossed the line?